St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-01-07
TH HOUSE.
Debates on Canals and Needs of the
NAVY.


WASHINGTON, Jan. 6.-During the
morning hour the house resolved itself into
a committee of the whole, Mr.. Crisp, of
Georgia, in the chair, for the consideration
OF the bill for the permanent improvement
OF the Erie and OSwego canals and to Sc
cure the freedom Of the same to the COM
merce of the United States. Mr.. Randall
suggested that an early vote should be
taken on the measure. 1t was not likely
to pass, and it would be well to allow some
other proposition to obtain the floor MI
Weaver, of Iowa, seconded this suggestion,
remarking that the bill would fail unless a
Hennepin canal appropriation was attached
to it. Mi. Weber. of New York, concluded
his argument in support of the measure,
urging that in commercial point of view
the canals were national in their character,
anu declaring that the fate of these
great waterways to the Eastern seaports
was in the hands of congress. Mr. Ander-
son, of Kansas. heartily favored the objects
designed to be accomplished by the bill.
The people OF the state of Kansas had
greater interest in the attainment of these
objects than the people of the state Of New
DIRK. The Erie canal stood as balance
on the capacity of the great trunk lines of
railroads. and it would be worth SO. OOO.-
600 to these roads if they could wipe out
that canal. 1t was to the interest of the
producers of the country that instead of
beng wiped out the canal should be en-
larged as proposed by the bill. Mr.. Muir
ply, of Iowa. said as he was in favor of
the construction of the Hennepn canal, So
was he in favor Of the enlargement of the
Erie canal, or of any other measure which
would give
THE WESTERN PRODUCER
cheaper transportation to the eastern mar
ketS. 1t was this question of cheap trans
portation which had led to the discussion
OF the interstate commerce bill now under
consideration, whose purpose was to give
the producer of the West and the consumer
of the East little relief from the burdens
imposed upon them by railroad rapacity.
Mr.. Nelson, of Minnesota contended thai
no methods of solving the cheap transpor-
tatlOn question could be more efficaciOus
than that of enlarging and improving the
canals. Mr. Plumb advocated the passage
of the bill, regarding it as the most i'm
portant one which had been brought to the
attention of the present congress. The
morning hour having expired, the commit
tee rose and the bill resumed its place on
committee of the whole (Mr. Springer. of
Illinois, in the chair on the pension appli-
cation bill, which appropriates ST6. 247, 500,
being only SIS. 900 below the estimate. the
reduction being in the item for the rent of
offices for pension agencies. Without
amendment or discussion, the bill was read
and reported to the house and passed. The
house then (yeas 1873, nays ~ went into
committee of the whole (Mr. Springer, of
Illinois, in the chair on
THE NAVAL REORGANIZATION BILL.
Mr.. Savers, of Texas. advocated the
measure. He proceeded to draw deplor-
able picture of navy too weak to fight and
too slow TO run away, and of navy yards
useless and worn out and utterly incapable
of constructing first class war vessels. and
in tracing the causes of this worthlessness
and decay to the cumbersome organization
of the navy, he fortified his position with
extracts from the expressed opinions of
Secretaries Whitney and Chandler. He
stated that the opposition to the measure was
directed TO that feature which provided for
the consolidation of t le bureau of equipment
and recruiting, of Steam engineering and of
construction and repair. But for the con-
sOlidation Of those three bureaus there
would be no obstacle to the passage of the
bill. Mr. Boutelle, of Maine, opposed the
bill.
THE EXISTING ORGANIZATION
of the navy was adequate to all demands
of the present and all the probable require
men of the future. Under the organiZa-
ton as it stood to-day the United States
navy department. confronted in 1861 by
more gigantic foe than it was likely to meet
n the immediate future. had been enabled,
in ihe twinkling of an eye, to call into ex-
lstence a naval equipment great and effect
i've in power and resources. This organi-
cation had been found to be efficient until
the return to power of that party which
had opposed the navy during the late dis
turbance. 1t might be cause for national
regret that in the organization of the navy
department in 1861 that department had
not had the assistance of the present chair
man OF the committee on naval affairs or of
his associates ON the other side of the
chamber, but at that time the gentlemen
had been engaged in efforts to consolidate
the United States navy and reduce the ex-
penses of the department by getting rid of
its surplus officers and men. But the navy
had done the best it could without them.